Yeah, probably about right...Malone is like 8 years older than him and has played in the NHL for all of that time...Tangradi has played 2 minutes a game for 40 games or whatever, but he's doing it in "bonus" time because Malone wasn't in the NHL at age 22...and now Tangradi is 23 and won't be 24 until February. At 24, Malone was being force-fed minutes on one of the worst teams since the merger because he was one of the few that put his skates on the correct feet at training camp...(thanks dad)...

So I hate to break to everyone, but Tangradi isn't a bust yet...I'm sorry.

Bust would imply an expected upside, which hasn't been reached.Personally, I don't have expectations for him (or any other interchangeable prospect), so I don't see the need to get too worked up over him either way.

The only reason people get so worked up about Tangradi is we've got no one else in the system that could fill a top 6 role, at least until Bennett is ready. We're impatient watching two generational talents at centers play some of their prime years being flanked by 3rd liners. Tangradi is finally starting to get it though. If there is a season, I'm cautiously optimistic he will stick in the top 9. Malkin and Neal should be paired for life, but the 3rd guy on that line isn't as critical. If Bylsma was willing to give Chris freaking Borque 20 games with Malkin, I'm sure we can give this kid the same when and if the NHL starts playing games. In any case, it's not like we have a whole lot of other options.

MRandall25 wrote:I'd say the difference in "size" between Tangradi and Malone is that Malone knows how to use his size to his advantage. Tangradi hasn't really developed in that sense yet, as far as we've seen.

Don't forget how long it actually took Malone to start playing that way, though. He was the whipping boy prior to the first Cup run because he was so big and had so much potential but he tried to play a fancy lad's game. It's not easy for some of these big guys with decent hands to step back and embrace the role they offer when they think they've got amazing hands.

MRandall25 wrote:I'd say the difference in "size" between Tangradi and Malone is that Malone knows how to use his size to his advantage. Tangradi hasn't really developed in that sense yet, as far as we've seen.

Don't forget how long it actually took Malone to start playing that way, though. He was the whipping boy prior to the first Cup run because he was so big and had so much potential but he tried to play a fancy lad's game. It's not easy for some of these big guys with decent hands to step back and embrace the role they offer when they think they've got amazing hands.

He was a 20 goal scorer the moment he came to the NHL though. I don't really think its the same at all. The only comparison is that they're both supposed to be big bodies.

MRandall25 wrote:I'd say the difference in "size" between Tangradi and Malone is that Malone knows how to use his size to his advantage. Tangradi hasn't really developed in that sense yet, as far as we've seen.

Don't forget how long it actually took Malone to start playing that way, though. He was the whipping boy prior to the first Cup run because he was so big and had so much potential but he tried to play a fancy lad's game. It's not easy for some of these big guys with decent hands to step back and embrace the role they offer when they think they've got amazing hands.

He was a 20 goal scorer the moment he came to the NHL though. I don't really think its the same at all. The only comparison is that they're both supposed to be big bodies.

Right, but Malone was also 23-turning-24 when he entered the NHL, which is exactly where Tangradi is now.

You'd swear that Tangradi and Malone were twin brothers the way people forcibly compare the two. I see absolutely nothing to suggest that Tangradi will have a career similar to Malone. He may look strong, but he never played tough enough to be an effective net-front player at the NHL level. Projecting him as a top-6 player is no different than the usual tendency to (vastly) overestimate the potential of a prospect. Perhaps instead of finding a comparable, we can examine the rest of the NHL and list top-6 players that are worse skaters than Tangradi? That should give you a better idea of what his chances are there.

That's a good start. Now does Tangradi have one of the best shots in the league or any other characteristics that make up for his skating? If not, let's move on to the next player.

Rather than moving on to discuss the (many) top 6 players with a flaw, why not move on to the next Pens prospect who could potentially play in the NHL, let alone top 6, if there is a season. Hmmmmm..... Nope, no options there.

Even in the worst case scenario is Tangradi's top 6 try out going to hurt Sid/Geno/the team? I doubt we will be discussing missed playoffs, city wide riots and the destruction of two likely HOF careers because ET got top 6 minutes for ten games. Best case scenario? The sky is certainly not the limit, but the possibility of 20 goals shouldn't be laughed off quicker than his concrete feet IMO.

Also, how about a more comprehensive list of players? I think the point of the exercise is to see how unusual it is and so far, the implication that as long as Tangradi can rise above like Heatley or Smyth is not exactly encouraging. Particularly so since the better parts of their career were in the pre lockout skating era (dull blade era?).

Smyth is really slow and has a really poor wrist shot especially in comparison to the amount of goals he has scored. He goes to the net hard and makes a mess and he plays physical along the boards, and just works hard. Tangradi has more skill than him, is faster than him and has a better shot than him. Smyth is a guy that probably averages a distance of about 4.6 feet per goal...he's a goal line back, so to speak...

That's a good start. Now does Tangradi have one of the best shots in the league or any other characteristics that make up for his skating? If not, let's move on to the next player.

Rather than moving on to discuss the (many) top 6 players with a flaw, why not move on to the next Pens prospect who could potentially play in the NHL, let alone top 6, if there is a season. Hmmmmm..... Nope, no options there.

Even in the worst case scenario is Tangradi's top 6 try out going to hurt Sid/Geno/the team? I doubt we will be discussing missed playoffs, city wide riots and the destruction of two likely HOF careers because ET got top 6 minutes for ten games. Best case scenario? The sky is certainly not the limit, but the possibility of 20 goals shouldn't be laughed off quicker than his concrete feet IMO.

Why not Bennett? I'm not saying he is a better option, but he is definitely another option.

mikey287 wrote:Smyth is really slow and has a really poor wrist shot especially in comparison to the amount of goals he has score. He goes to the net hard and makes a mess and he plays physical along the boards, and just works hard. Tangradi has more skill than him, is faster than him and has a better shot than him. Smyth is a guy that probably averages a distance of about 4.6 feet per goal...he's a goal line back, so to speak...

Yeah, I know he is a net guy, I just didn't particularly remember his skating (past & present) or his shot now that you mention it.

steelhammer wrote:Also, how about a more comprehensive list of players? I think the point of the exercise is to see how unusual it is and so far, the implication that as long as Tangradi can rise above like Heatley or Smyth is not exactly encouraging. Particularly so since the better parts of their career were in the pre lockout skating era (dull blade era?).

I'm really just playing along with the question...you asked for some comparatively slow top-six forwards, I said and now am saying: Heatley, Smyth, Clowe, Brunette, formerly Cheechoo, Trent Hunter when he was, Lucic is remarkably slow in accelerating, Holmstrom was a top PP guy, one of the slowest players in the league, Malone wasn't exactly a speed demon himself, Guerin by the time he was here, Knuble, Michel Ouellet (:lol:)...is it unusual for a player like Tangradi to be an impact player in the top-six on a contender? Yes. I'm not sure if anyone has said otherwise. However, is it equally unusual to have to resort to fringe players (Ferriero), career third liners (Cooke), undrafted free agent signings (Megna) or not-yet-ripe prospects (Bennett) to try to fill a spot on the top line of a contender? Yeah, I'd say so. So, all options need to be considered in the mean time.

Idoit40fans wrote:Why not Bennett? I'm not saying he is a better option, but he is definitely another option.

Far as I know general consensus is that Bennett needs at least another year to crack the NHL, but is certainly headed in that direction. Tangradi is older and more experienced though it could be argued that injuries and restricted minutes in an unfamiliar role have hampered his progression in the NHL. Unlike Bennett, ET seems to have been in a perpetual 'now or never' position since his arrival.

meow wrote:Not that is has anything to do with the whole Smyth - Tangradi comparison, but when Smyth was Tangradi's age, he had scored almost twice as many NHL goals as Tangradi has NHL games.

When Smyth was Tangradi's age, we were right in the heart of the clutch-and-grab era where speed wasn't nearly as much of a factor.

Correct. Or else I could have named some more sluggish players from that era that didn't exactly translate to post-lockout top-sixes...Jason Allison is still not finished taking his first shootout attempt...the main cause of the lockout.

Man does it drive me crazy when people compare Tangradi to Guerin. Guerin's brain (positional play, antagonizing behavior), was genius. There is a reason why he was so successful. Guerin's last season, I used to watch him in isolation and was blown away by his inherent instincts to know where the pass needed to go and where he needed to be to get the pass.

Just skating, nothing else. If people wanted more criteria, they should have asked. I was presented with the challenge of picking similarly slow top-six forwards which I did. If people want to move the goalposts around and talk about shot quality or instincts or whatever, then you'll want to include that in the original criteria in the future.